The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
i'm saying that we may not have the ability to appropriately determine who's who we can say overall on average doing this will increase this or that but i think that just looking around it seems at least pretty clear to me that there are some people who you give them a certain response and man do they look like world beaters a couple months later
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
but I think that just looking around it seems at least pretty clear to me that there are some people who you give them a certain response and man do they look like World beaters a couple months later so that does tell me something is is different about but I don't know that we could detect that with a lot of the measurements that we have